Skip to main content

Table 3 Smoking status estimates (treatment equation) of the endogenous treatment effects model with an ordered outcome considering potential endogeneity between smoking and body weight

From: An empirical investigation of the impact of smoking on body weight using an endogenous treatment effects model approach: the role of food consumption patterns

Variables Smoking participation
Full sample Males Females
Sociodemographic characteristicsa
 Gender (women) 0.288*
(0.152)   
 30–60 years old 0.283*** 0.346** 0.195
(0.111) (0.148) (0.164)
 Over 60 years old − 0.849*** −0.748*** − 0.999***
(0.137) (0.185) (0.206)
 Married −0.283*** −0.186 − 0.384***
(0.095) (0.127) (0.143)
 Divorced/widowed 0.137 0.302 0.043
(0.128) (0.187) (0.179)
 Big city 0.026 0.031 −0.007
(0.088) (0.121) (0.130)
 Village/Rural area −0.182** −0.218* − 0.153
(0.082) (0.113) (0.123)
 Post-secondary education −0.497*** − 0.522*** − 0.486***
(0.082) (0.111) (0.126)
 Post-graduate studies −0.782*** − 0.855*** − 0.732***
(0.092) (0.117) (0.155)
Frequent consumption of:
 Whole grain bread −0.170** − 0.124 − 0.229**
(0.071) (0.095) (0.108)
 White-toasted bread 0.189** 0.353*** −0.057
(0.078) (0.101) (0.124)
 Fruits −0.468*** −0.557*** − 0.383***
(0.079) (0.103) (0.124)
 Vegetables −0.124* 0.137 −0.422***
(0.075) (0.104) (0.108)
 Meat products 0.299*** 0.349** 0.309**
(0.097) (0.160) (0.124)
 Deep fried foods 0.119 0.157 0.102
(0.126) (0.151) (0.228)
 Confectionery −0.180*** −0.182* −0.216**
(0.069) (0.094) (0.103)
 Smoking prevalence 0.061*** 0.064*** 0.056**
(0.014) (0.018) (0.025)
Log-Likelihood function − 1797.997 − 975.637 − 808.419
  1. Standard errors are given in parentheses
  2. aAge: 18–29 years old (reference category), Marital status: single (reference category)
  3. Area of residence: town (reference category), Educational attainment: up to secondary education (reference category)
  4. *p < 0.1, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01 (Statistically significant variables are highlighted in bold)